Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

The reason why it's repeated as a story is because it's so unusual that it virtually never happens.

Is it possible to face someone down with chutzpah and "being there in the moment"? Sure - but it has nothing to do with conditioning in the body - of which they have none. If it did, then monks with a long history of breath training would regularly have faced down the fighters who killed them - but historically that is just not the case.

Best,

Chris

Curious, so, from a pure evolution and natural selection perspective ... how have pacifists survived?

Curious, so, from a pure evolution and natural selection perspective ... how have pacifists survived?

They have an army protecting them. Or a society that has an armed populace. History is filled with armed groups killing unarmed, peace protestors or pacifists. One of the most extreme examples was the Hutus killing their own peace-filled Hutu people. The Hutu military threatened Hutu civilians that if they did not kill Tutsi, then they (Hutu civilians) would be shot and killed. And they did carry out their threats.

Evolution and natural selection have nothing to do with pacifists. Society does. Apples and Airplanes.

They have an army protecting them. Or a society that has an armed populace. History is filled with armed groups killing unarmed, peace protestors or pacifists. One of the most extreme examples was the Hutus killing their own peace-filled Hutu people. The Hutu military threatened Hutu civilians that if they did not kill Tutsi, then they (Hutu civilians) would be shot and killed. And they did carry out their threats.

Evolution and natural selection have nothing to do with pacifists. Society does. Apples and Airplanes.

If we accept evolution and natural selection (or if we don't then fine), but if we do, then to quote Darwin ...

"I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection"

It seems reasonable to presume that pacifism did not always exist, that it did in fact come into being as a 'slight variation" and since it seems to have been preserved, then, according to Darwin, it must be useful. Of course we would have to acknowledge that any ideology, while useful to some will be deemed a threat to others, and thus your example of the Hutu.

The argument is that because pacifism exists, it must be useful and that usefulness must be a source of protection for the pacifist. No?

If we accept evolution and natural selection (or if we don't then fine), but if we do, then to quote Darwin ...

"I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection"

It seems reasonable to presume that pacifism did not always exist, that it did in fact come into being as a 'slight variation" and since it seems to have been preserved, then, according to Darwin, it must be useful. Of course we would have to acknowledge that any ideology, while useful to some will be deemed a threat to others, and thus your example of the Hutu.

The argument is that because pacifism exists, it must be useful and that usefulness must be a source of protection for the pacifist. No?

The fact that something survived doesn't make it a source of protection.

Acne survived, does that make it useful against muggings?

Stupidity survived, does that make it an effective force for self protection?

Look back at the historic record - it tells the whole story, if you leave your imagination aside.

I'm not saying that pacifism, or any kind of breathing/meditative work is bad - just that it won't help you much in the kind of situations that we're discussing. If you think it will - then no need to get on the mat at all.

FWIW, I lived for 13 years in a gang-ridden neighborhood in Chicago. Been in a good portion of the sleazy bars there. Here in Albuquerque, every day for 3 years at 7am, ! would walk several miles to work through what we affectionately call the "War Zone." Total number of confrontations: 0

In the negative, isn't Darwin really saying that if you have 'protect' yourself then you aren't very useful?

Here's a funny thing, kind people and kind and wise people are usually fiercely protected by those who know them.

An old kind lady who ran a small cafe on portobello market never got any trouble from the local hoods or drug dealers or louts and in fact got the utmost respect from them.

I think she survived much longer and was much happier than most of those too.

Peace.G.

Plenty of nice old ladies get mugged and killed every day - what's your point, that a nice old lady lives a better live than a drug dealer, or that military and police just aren't necessary if you think good thoughts?

FWIW, I lived for 13 years in a gang-ridden neighborhood in Chicago. Been in a good portion of the sleazy bars there. Here in Albuquerque, every day for 3 years at 7am, ! would walk several miles to work through what we affectionately call the "War Zone." Total number of confrontations: 0

In the negative, isn't Darwin really saying that if you have 'protect' yourself then you aren't very useful?

And then, thousands of nice kind people are mugged and killed every year - that you haven't been proves exactly nothing.

About Darwin - no.

What do you think about Kisshomaru's statement that his father was not a pacifist?

Plenty of nice old ladies get mugged and killed every day - what's your point, that a nice old lady lives a better live than a drug dealer, or that military and police just aren't necessary if you think good thoughts?

Best,

Chris

What do you mean what's my point? I already made it. I didn't say any little old lady thank you. I'll repeat it just for you.

Kind people are fiercely protected by those who know them. This kind of adds a little extra to trying to compare animals to humans using darwinian theory.

The sword I use is the sword of kindness. I'll leave you to work that one out.

What do you mean what's my point? I already made it. I didn't say any little old lady thank you. I'll repeat it just for you.

Kind people are fiercely protected by those who know them. This kind of adds a little extra to trying to compare animals to humans using darwinian theory.

The sword I use is the sword of kindness. I'll leave you to work that one out.

Peace.G.

Frankly, that's meaningless. All that does is shift the requirement for your defense to somebody else who may (or may not) be willing to protect you. It also doesn't work - just look at all the kind people slaughtered throughout history.

Of course there's a difference between a proof and a data point, and as you can imagine that there are plenty of data points that show that average folks get on quite well in rough areas, that the majority of deaths in these high crime areas are gang and drug related, that concealed carry laws due decrease the incidence of crime, that bad-asses die, that innocents suffer, etc.

So, without a whole lot of thought, we would have to conclude that it just comes down to personal, quality of life decisions. If you are happier studying a martial art, thinking that you will need it to one day defend yourself, then have at it.

After getting a shodan in aikido, early 90's, I thought I'd do some cross-training in a very self-defense oriented, northern style kung fu. I gave it a shot, a little over a year (while still studying aikido). I finally stopped when I started getting crazy thoughts like ... "If that person makes a move, I could take out a knee, elbow to the temple and thumb to the eye" I was not seeing a fellow human, I was seeing a set of potential target areas. I hadn't had those thoughts doing aikido, and haven't had them since.

Frankly, that's meaningless. All that does is shift the requirement for your defense to somebody else who may (or may not) be willing to protect you. It also doesn't work - just look at all the kind people slaughtered throughout history.

Best,

Chris

Actually it does work for it is true. History is written in the form of agrressiveness and how it does this and that as if it's natural. So like sheep people follow it.

Maybe they should study the history of kindness and peace for it not only clears up all the mess created by war and the theory of darwin put into the human realm but it is the kindness which saves people in wars and bad situations. Thus even in such chaotic and destructive circumstances the instances of courage and kindness shine like beacons such is the power of it.

They are so bright and heartwarming that I feel sorry for those who can't see it for they truly must be blind.

Plus I think you will find the aggressive in both war and life get slaughtered too and in far greater number. Those interested in glory fail to mention this glaringly obvious fact and thus they glory in death.

Even the 'fighting' monks, who by the way were more feared than the samurai, and developed more skill and internal skills than them or any martial arts had one major difference. The Samourai and so called fierce warriors actually meditated on being dead already in an effort to be fearless whilst the fearless monks had a different all powerful stability and that was that they meditated on life. So you could say the one point or center of the samurai was death yet quite opposite to the one point of the monks.

Life always wins and war always loses and when mankind destroys itself then life will carry on regardless.

The true reality cannot be hidden by such history of empires and strength for they rise and fall in there arrogance and rightness and ignorance, unaware of the true power of life of which kindness is the golden light so to speak.

All seekers of so called internal strength will hopefully come to realize these things eventually and understand Aikido. God willing.

and so we observe the floating bridge manifested in a thread ... starting from a singularity of pure potential (in this case, the potential of humans to create ideas and make associations). an idea forms ... yang and yin inevitably appear - the yang of affirmation, advancing the original idea, the yin of negation, in terms of countering ideas. yang and yin in concert as they always are - asmutually opposing activities. there will always be a point of maximum activity and the cycle predicts that we will inevitably come to a point where the thread ceases - yang and yin will disappear. and what is left? a singularity of pure potential (the floating bridge) ... in this case, the mind's ability to create ideas and make associations, waiting for the idea that spawns the next thread ... marvelous!

Well...no, I've seen plenty of frail folks get picked on or beat up. Just take a look at nature - the weak ones in the herd get cut out first, all imagination aside.

Best,

Chris

That is a myth. I used to work for the city-council of Amsterdam and studied the yearly figures; the people that are most likely to be a victim of violence are young males in there teens and early twenties. Young, aggressive, dominant men who have an urge to prove something. Hormone-driven they will always find a reason to pick a fight with another young man with the same attitude.
These figures have been compared to figures in other cities all over the world. Same results everywhere.

It is not possible to compare it with predators in nature who try to cut out one animal out of a herd. But even if we would want to make that comparison; it is not true that it is always the weak that gets cut out. Many times it is the weak (the young) that are best protected.

Funny thing is; I usually get to hear this "weak frail old lady that gets raped, mugged and murdered" myth from people who are training martial arts. Is saving such an elderly lady an archetypical phantasy for everyone who is into martial arts?

One of the inspiring notions of being in balance with heaven and earth as we stand on the heavenly floating bridge is that there is no longer a need for anyone to attack us. That seems to me a form of strength or power that is worth working towards.

That is a myth. I used to work for the city-council of Amsterdam and studied the yearly figures; the people that are most likely to be a victim of violence are young males in there teens and early twenties. Young, aggressive, dominant men who have an urge to prove something. Hormone-driven they will always find a reason to pick a fight with another young man with the same attitude.
These figures have been compared to figures in other cities all over the world. Same results everywhere.

It is not possible to compare it with predators in nature who try to cut out one animal out of a herd. But even if we would want to make that comparison; it is not true that it is always the weak that gets cut out. Many times it is the weak (the young) that are best protected.

Funny thing is; I usually get to hear this "weak frail old lady that gets raped, mugged and murdered" myth from people who are training martial arts. Is saving such an elderly lady an archetypical phantasy for everyone who is into martial arts?

One of the inspiring notions of being in balance with heaven and earth as we stand on the heavenly floating bridge is that there is no longer a need for anyone to attack us. That seems to me a form of strength or power that is worth working towards.

Tom

Violent crime in general, yes - but the elderly are more likely to be victims of violent crime by strangers, according to the US Department of Justice statistics.

None of which matters - you pointed out yourself that young people are more likely to put themselves in a situation where such a thing will occur, and the fact that someone else gets attacked too doesn't eliminate the problem for the elderly.

The point is - there is no inherent protection in appearing frail and weak. The discussion had nothing to do about "fantasies of saving an elderly lady", which wasn't even mentioned until you brought it up - I suggest that you go back and read the thread.

Being at a point where there is no need for anyone to attack us (although I question whether such a point can actually be reached) is all well and good, but that's not what I'm talking about here.

The Floating Bridge of Heaven as described by Ueshiba really has nothing to do with "being in balance with Heaven and Earth" in that sense. He is describing a training methodology, a very old one, and one that has to do with martial application.

Violent crime in general, yes - but the elderly are more likely to be victims of violent crime by strangers, according to the US Department of Justice statistics.

None of which matters - you pointed out yourself that young people are more likely to put themselves in a situation where such a thing will occur, and the fact that someone else gets attacked too doesn't eliminate the problem for the elderly.

The point is - there is no inherent protection in appearing frail and weak. The discussion had nothing to do about "fantasies of saving an elderly lady", which wasn't even mentioned until you brought it up - I suggest that you go back and read the thread.

Being at a point where there is no need for anyone to attack us (although I question whether such a point can actually be reached) is all well and good, but that's not what I'm talking about here.

The Floating Bridge of Heaven as described by Ueshiba really has nothing to do with "being in balance with Heaven and Earth" in that sense. He is describing a training methodology, a very old one, and one that has to do with martial application.

Best,

Chris

Well, excuse me for bringing up a seemingly new point to the discussion. I did not realize there was a rule on this forum that said this is not allowed.

I never said that appearing frail and weak gives an inherent protection. But being strong and aggressive does not give any inherent protection either.

I tend to see dominance, aggression and arrogance as appearances of inner weakness. If not visible immediate, then in the long run. It should not be the direction for Aikido to go. O Sensei pointed in a different direction. Several of the traditional ryu did as well. In accordance with the classic philosophers.
They all seem to have in common a striving towards a natural, everyday, calm and kind mind with a body reflecting that. And I would call that a strength, not a weakness. And as I said, that strength is worthwhile pursuing, for anyone, but especially those who are into Budo or more specifically Aikido.

Your search seems to be about another kind of strength, but from your writing it is not altogether clear what it is that you are looking for. But I do get the impression that it is something different from what the ancient philosophers were writing about, different from what classical ryu were aiming at and different as what is being taught at the Shinto- Shingon and Zen schools.

The floating bridge of heaven may very well be a description of Ueshiba's training method - and you seem to suggest it as a specific training method to gain inner strength for a martial application. You present this here as a fact, but the truth is that a lot is mere speculation, guessing or interpretation.

I am interested in where you are going with this, but up till now you have not delivered the goods.

Well, excuse me for bringing up a seemingly new point to the discussion. I did not realize there was a rule on this forum that said this is not allowed.

I never said that appearing frail and weak gives an inherent protection. But being strong and aggressive does not give any inherent protection either.

I tend to see dominance, aggression and arrogance as appearances of inner weakness. If not visible immediate, then in the long run. It should not be the direction for Aikido to go. O Sensei pointed in a different direction. Several of the traditional ryu did as well. In accordance with the classic philosophers.
They all seem to have in common a striving towards a natural, everyday, calm and kind mind with a body reflecting that. And I would call that a strength, not a weakness. And as I said, that strength is worthwhile pursuing, for anyone, but especially those who are into Budo or more specifically Aikido.

Again, you're arguing against something that hasn't been brought up. Nobody here has said that being calm and kind is a bad thing. Nobody here has said that being strong and aggressive (in the way that I think you're talking about) is a good thing. They have said that being calm alone is not going to provide you with much protection against an attacker.

Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote:

Your search seems to be about another kind of strength, but from your writing it is not altogether clear what it is that you are looking for. But I do get the impression that it is something different from what the ancient philosophers were writing about, different from what classical ryu were aiming at and different as what is being taught at the Shinto- Shingon and Zen schools.

The floating bridge of heaven may very well be a description of Ueshiba's training method - and you seem to suggest it as a specific training method to gain inner strength for a martial application. You present this here as a fact, but the truth is that a lot is mere speculation, guessing or interpretation.

I am interested in where you are going with this, but up till now you have not delivered the goods.

Best,

Tom

Well, I've laid out my arguments, with references to the Founder and to external supporting resources. The arguments could well be more complete - but I'm not going to go there in the context of a blog, which I think should keep to the basic outline.

I'd love to see your explanation of it, with similar references (I'm not kidding - I'd like to to see more people digging into these things).

The physical expression of what I'm writing about is happening in many places around the world right at this moment - I think that Dan is in London today if you can get across the channel - he'll be in Holland next weekend if you can't.

Again, you're arguing against something that hasn't been brought up. Nobody here has said that being calm and kind is a bad thing. Nobody here has said that being strong and aggressive (in the way that I think you're talking about) is a good thing. They have said that being calm alone is not going to provide you with much protection against an attacker.

Well, I've laid out my arguments, with references to the Founder and to external supporting resources. The arguments could well be more complete - but I'm not going to go there in the context of a blog, which I think should keep to the basic outline.

I'd love to see your explanation of it, with similar references (I'm not kidding - I'd like to to see more people digging into these things).

The physical expression of what I'm writing about is happening in many places around the world right at this moment - I think that Dan is in London today if you can get across the channel - he'll be in Holland next weekend if you can't.

Best,

Chris

This conversation is starting to sound like Abbott and Costello's "who's on first".

I am not arguing against anything here!

I am trying to express what inner strength could mean. Or what it means to me. Or what I have learned from my teachers. Or what I have found in the religious/philosophical/martial traditions that I have studied. One of these expressions of inner strength is a mental and physical calmness and even kindness. To an onlooker this may come across as weakness. Hence the start of this part of the discussion. But in the Budo tradition we learn to look closer - is there really a weakness or a suki here? There are pictures of O Sensei where he seems very relaxed and he is also getting older. Yet if you look at him, is there really a suki?
The calmness, the kindness and even the politeness that I am talking about are all part of Aiki awareness. Just as creativity is. And that is to be found in the story of Izanagi and Izanami and the floating bridge of heaven (as you translate it).

If you are saying that this is not what you mean by inner strength or Aiki for that matter, fine! I am open to new ideas or different approaches. And if you want to put them on your website first or publish it in a book - I'll be patient!

But untill that time could you stop throwing sand in my eyes? I still have no definition of what you mean by inner strength or of this different kind of Aiki. It is, as you stated, not what the students of O Sensei are doing, it has not really to do with breathing as Dan Harden stated (I take it for granted that you agree with him), which is a statement if I may add that goes against all traditions, including Western tradition and clarifies...nothing. According to you O Sensei showed it (do we have it on tape?) but he did not teach it, you pointed out. It is not muscle power, it is not aggression or dominance? Is it similar to what Takuan Soho is talking about? Is it something universal? Can I apply it while riding my horse? Or drawing my longbow?

If you would ask me how a horse looks like I could give you a fair description of a horse or as Plato would put it the idea of a horse. I would not ask of you to run after a particular horse.
I can accept that Dan Harden is the physical expression of your ideas. I might say the same of my teachers. What I find unacceptable is that you would consider him as the sole person who can physically express this new found but very old concept of inner strength or concept of Aiki in the world.
Even O Sensei himself referred to others, even outside the Aiki tradition, as exponents of deep understanding of Aiki. In my classes I give examples from other disciplines so my students can come to a better and quicker understanding of what they should be looking for. Teachers in other disciplines do the same. I had a university-teacher of math as an Aikido student in my class. He was able to teach me complex theories of math with all kinds of examples from daily life.
Now if you can do that then you are giving a true example of genuine transmission of knowledge.

You give me nothing to work on.
Yes, you have laid out your arguments, yes you gave references to the founder and yes you gave external supporting resources. But of what?
It is not just that it is incomplete. Nothing that you mention is new to anybody who is familiar with the Shinto traditions. The only real improvement lies in the translations of O Sensei's words. But where does that show us proof of a different idea of Aiki? Or a different idea of inner strength? Where does it point to only a martial application? And where does this idea of only a martial application come from? Not from the classics that I have read!

You give your approach the smell of science, but it is not really a scientific approach. It is only meant to "prove" your own doctrine. You are not really open for contributions from others. Unless they have anything to add to what you are already saying. That is not the critical mind of a scientist.

And sure, I would love to give an explanation of "it" and a list of references. If only I knew what you meant by "it".

Nevertheless, I am curious to your next "revelations" on your website.

This conversation is starting to sound like Abbott and Costello's "who's on first".

I am not arguing against anything here!

I am trying to express what inner strength could mean. Or what it means to me. Or what I have learned from my teachers. Or what I have found in the religious/philosophical/martial traditions that I have studied. One of these expressions of inner strength is a mental and physical calmness and even kindness. To an onlooker this may come across as weakness. Hence the start of this part of the discussion. But in the Budo tradition we learn to look closer - is there really a weakness or a suki here? There are pictures of O Sensei where he seems very relaxed and he is also getting older. Yet if you look at him, is there really a suki?

Look, you stepped right into a conversation already in progress. That means that what you say gets taken in with the context of the conversation. Otherwise, best to start a new thread.

Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote:

I can accept that Dan Harden is the physical expression of your ideas. I might say the same of my teachers. What I find unacceptable is that you would consider him as the sole person who can physically express this new found but very old concept of inner strength or concept of Aiki in the world.

That, I never said. I said that Dan was near you and could show you physically what we're talking about - there are numerous others who could do so as well.

Quote:

Tom Verhoeven wrote:

You give me nothing to work on.
Yes, you have laid out your arguments, yes you gave references to the founder and yes you gave external supporting resources. But of what?
It is not just that it is incomplete. Nothing that you mention is new to anybody who is familiar with the Shinto traditions. The only real improvement lies in the translations of O Sensei's words. But where does that show us proof of a different idea of Aiki? Or a different idea of inner strength? Where does it point to only a martial application? And where does this idea of only a martial application come from? Not from the classics that I have read!

You give your approach the smell of science, but it is not really a scientific approach. It is only meant to "prove" your own doctrine. You are not really open for contributions from others. Unless they have anything to add to what you are already saying. That is not the critical mind of a scientist.

And sure, I would love to give an explanation of "it" and a list of references. If only I knew what you meant by "it".

Nevertheless, I am curious to your next "revelations" on your website.

All the best with your search,

Gassho,

Tom

Tom - you really haven't given any contributions to be critical of, so far as I could see, just some general statements that weren't really all that relevant to the post in question.

Anyway, the blogs aren't meant to "prove" anything - and I've said that in the blogs themselves, more than once. I'm just trying to point towards some of the deeper implications.

Are there other, philosophical implications? Sure there are - but those are, and must be (according to Ueshiba) founded upon and connected to the physical training methodology. So saying that, for example, being calm is an important goal is good - but how you get there is specific to Ueshiba's training method, so saying that being calm is Heaven-Earth-Man is not, IMO, quite correct, since that is really the effect and not the cause.